Starmer, the man of the second referendum who always hated Brexit, is now trying to rejoin by stealth. This time, the Labour government is seeking to restore regulatory alignment with the EU, while accepting subservience to the highly political European Court of Justice. In doing so, it appears to be continuing the UK’s role as the main subsidy power for European farmers.Accepting the jurisdiction of the ECJ would mean that we are, in effect, going back inside the EU — or perhaps worse: handing rule-making powers to foreign judges and raising prices for UK consumers. This was one of the Conservative government’s red lines during Brexit negotiations — that it would never accept ECJ jurisdiction. Although, it must be said, Rishi Sunak then sold out Northern Ireland in the Windsor Framework.This revelation comes as proposals are being discussed ahead of the first UK–EU summit, set to take place in London this May, aimed at defining a new future for our post-Brexit relationship. The move suggests an effort by the government to surrender our regulatory freedoms — along with our fish — to the EU, even though this could have a detrimental effect on trade negotiations with the United States.LATEST DEVELOPMENTS ‘Labour needs to block China’s mega-embassy plans and stand up to its bullying Communist Party’Why Jacob Rees Mogg must take Farage’s call – and say yes! – Kelvin MacKenzie’We need to restore Britain’s economy,’ says Jacob Rees MoggAny shift toward regulatory alignment would damage Britain’s ability to secure trade deals with nations that do not follow EU processes, including the U.S. Put simply, when it comes to regulation, the U.S. uses outcome standards “is the product safe?” while the EU relies on process standards “Has the method of production been followed, and has the paperwork been completed?”Both systems aim for similar food safety outcomes, yet Starmer insists that Britain doesn’t need to choose between its special relationships with the U.S. and the EU. But if that’s true, why should we be following EU food regulations when we’re their biggest customer? They sell us more than three times what we export to them. Why are we subsidising French, Irish, and Dutch farmers — at the cost of you, ladies and gentlemen, the British consumer?During the election campaign, Labour said it wouldn’t try to reverse Brexit but now, it seems, that’s exactly what the government is doing. Reattaching the shackles to the body politic will only make British consumers poorer and British businesses more burdened with red tape. For example, we would not have been able to pass emergency legislation to save British Steel as swiftly as we did — it would have required EU state aid approval.It’s worth reminding ourselves of the absurdity of this dynamic. French President Emmanuel Macron even suggested that a UK–France defence partnership for Ukraine might not happen unless France gains increased access to British fishing waters. Little Emmanuel would rather risk the Russian bear than be sensible about fish.The EU has always wanted the UK to be one of its colonies, subject to its rules. We must not fall for its wiles. Instead, we should push ahead with British freedoms: saving steel, welcoming AI, cutting tariffs, and signing free trade deals — all of which the EU continues to restrict.
Whole-of-society effort needed to deter Russia threat, armed forces chief says
...
Read moreDetails
